Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Debono36506  
#1 Posted : 05 February 2010 18:13:28(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
Debono36506

I would like to share a court sentence and the possible implications on future sentences that were concluded few weeks ago here in Malta.

A Project Supervisor Construction Stage was taken to court and found guilty for his accuses because of the following reasons:

The supervisor communicated with a client's representative and with not with the client directly
The supervisor communicated mostly by e-mail and not verbally
The supervisor was not deployed on site full time

This has raised concerns to the rest of us because the sentence now implies that irrelevant of the size of the project, a full time project supervisor should always be deployed on site and it seams that even if contractors or the client (as it is almost always the case) do not want to improve the situation it is the supervisor that will take the blame.

I would like to hear the views of some of you fellow IOSH members who witnessed or had experience in the past about similar prosecutions.

(Please note that as per the Maltese regulations, it is the duty of the Client to designate the project supervisors)

Regards
Nick
Users browsing this topic
Guest
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.